What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5414768 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5414768?

Cleaning: $1,955.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Garage Remote: $149.50 awarded to landlord; Gate Remote: $45.00 awarded to landlord; Meth Testing: $1,929.72 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $494.50 awarded to landlord; Rent: $3,925.64 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Vanity: $575.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5414768?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5414768?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13395463-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5414768 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5414768?

Cleaning: $1,955.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Garage Remote: $149.50 awarded to landlord; Gate Remote: $45.00 awarded to landlord; Meth Testing: $1,929.72 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $494.50 awarded to landlord; Rent: $3,925.64 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Vanity: $575.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5414768?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5414768?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13395463-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5414768 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5414768 — net $3,382.36 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent to 14 November 2025	$3,925.64	Rent to 14 November 2025
Meth cleaning	$1,955.00	Meth cleaning
Replace furnishings: vanity	$575.00	Replace furnishings: vanity
Gate remote	$45.00	Gate remote
Lock/key replacement	$494.50	Lock/key replacement
Garage remote	$149.50	Garage remote
Meth testing	$1,929.72	Meth testing
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,382.36
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,382.36

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Joshua Preston must pay [The landlord/s] $3,382.36 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $5,720.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing today, 2 April 2026.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Rent
The tenancy ended on 14 November 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. Cleaning and Locks
At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit.
It is not clear if the tenant left the premises reasonably clean and tidy, or if the cleaning costs claimed are reasonable, because no photographs were taken before the cleaning was performed. I decline to award general cleaning and carpet cleaning costs.
The tenant did not return the keys and remotes. The locks had to be changed to secure the property. Damage
A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for.
The landlord said there was a square hole cut out of the carpet, broken window stays, a dirty carpet, a missing cat-flap, a damaged spa-pool cover, and a cracked vanity.
The vanity was the only damaged item that was photographed. The tenant said the cracking started during the tenancy and got worse, although he was unsure why.
It seems likely that the vanity was being leaned on causing cracking. The cost of replacing the vanity was $575.00 which is less than the insurance excess of $2,500.00. (I understood this was the standard excess not just the excess for methamphetamine contamination)
The landlord said the spa pool cover was broken. The tenant said it started to wear during the tenancy. Without photographs, it is unclear what happened to the spa cover, whether it wore out or was carelessly damaged by the tenant. I decline to award the cost of a replacement cover.
Due to the lack of supporting photographs, I also decline to award compensation for the damage to the carpet, windows, and cat-flap. The landlord mentioned that she was only able to take a quick look around prior to being instructed to leave for health and safety reasons. The meth decontamination work and repairs were performed before the landlord could re-enter to take photographs. The tenant was not there at the end of the tenancy. Any award would be based on what the landlord saw during a quick review, without the benefit of photographs, and without the tenant having any ability to comment. Methamphetamine Costs
The landlord claimed decontamination costs and was permitted to add testing costs during the hearing.
Section 40(2)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) provides that a tenant must not use, or permit the premises to be used, for an unlawful purpose.
The tenant explained that he was not at the premises for the last 2 months of the tenancy because he was on bail, and his ex-partner lived there with his knowledge. The tenant said he did not see anyone using meth in the house.
Methamphetamine use or manufacture at residential premises is a breach of section 40(2)(b) of the Act.
In June 2017, Standards New Zealand published standard NZS 8510:2017 (the NZ Standard) for testing and decontamination of methamphetamine- contaminated properties. This adopted a standard of 1.5ug/100cm² for high use areas, for both manufacture and use.
Professor Gluckman, the government’s chief science advisor, authored a report dated 29 May 2018 which concluded that methamphetamine levels exceeding the NZ Standard level of 1.5ug/100cm² “...should not be regarded as signaling a health risk”. The report said that exposure to methamphetamine levels below 15ug/100cm² would be unlikely to give rise to any adverse effects.
In Full Circle Real Estate v Piper [2019] NZDC 4947 the District Court had to determine whether the level of methamphetamine contamination would present a risk to human health. The District Court said the Gluckman report constituted the best available knowledge of the risks to human health from methamphetamine contamination. Therefore, it must be established not only that the premises are contaminated, but that there is contamination above 15ug/100cm².
The methamphetamine contamination was in the bathroom, which provided a reading of 16.5 ug/100cm². These findings are consistent with consumption, as noted in the testing reports.
The tenant said the decontamination cost of $1,955.00 was excessive for one room. Unfortunately, the Tribunal does not have any comparative costings to enable an assessment. I award the decontamination costs.
The landlord claimed $344.88 for a composite test invoiced on 20 November 2025, $320.85 for a screening test invoiced on 1 December 2025, $1,483.00 for the testing of individual samples invoiced on 3 December 2025 and $113.85 for testing an individual sample in the bathroom invoiced on 5 December 2025.
I can understand the testing of individual samples and the subsequent testing of the bathroom following decontamination. I award $1,596.85 for these tests. I am not sure why there were effectively two screening tests. I reduce this part of the testing costs by 50% and award $332.87.
Although the tenant did not use drugs at the premises, he is liable for the actions of others pursuant to section 41 of the Act. Filing Fee and Name Suppression
The landlord’s application has been largely successful. I must award the filing fee.
Suppression is granted as requested.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5414768 — net $3,382.36 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent to 14 November 2025	$3,925.64	Rent to 14 November 2025
Meth cleaning	$1,955.00	Meth cleaning
Replace furnishings: vanity	$575.00	Replace furnishings: vanity
Gate remote	$45.00	Gate remote
Lock/key replacement	$494.50	Lock/key replacement
Garage remote	$149.50	Garage remote
Meth testing	$1,929.72	Meth testing
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,382.36
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,382.36

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Joshua Preston must pay [The landlord/s] $3,382.36 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $5,720.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing today, 2 April 2026.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Rent
The tenancy ended on 14 November 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. Cleaning and Locks
At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit.
It is not clear if the tenant left the premises reasonably clean and tidy, or if the cleaning costs claimed are reasonable, because no photographs were taken before the cleaning was performed. I decline to award general cleaning and carpet cleaning costs.
The tenant did not return the keys and remotes. The locks had to be changed to secure the property. Damage
A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for.
The landlord said there was a square hole cut out of the carpet, broken window stays, a dirty carpet, a missing cat-flap, a damaged spa-pool cover, and a cracked vanity.
The vanity was the only damaged item that was photographed. The tenant said the cracking started during the tenancy and got worse, although he was unsure why.
It seems likely that the vanity was being leaned on causing cracking. The cost of replacing the vanity was $575.00 which is less than the insurance excess of $2,500.00. (I understood this was the standard excess not just the excess for methamphetamine contamination)
The landlord said the spa pool cover was broken. The tenant said it started to wear during the tenancy. Without photographs, it is unclear what happened to the spa cover, whether it wore out or was carelessly damaged by the tenant. I decline to award the cost of a replacement cover.
Due to the lack of supporting photographs, I also decline to award compensation for the damage to the carpet, windows, and cat-flap. The landlord mentioned that she was only able to take a quick look around prior to being instructed to leave for health and safety reasons. The meth decontamination work and repairs were performed before the landlord could re-enter to take photographs. The tenant was not there at the end of the tenancy. Any award would be based on what the landlord saw during a quick review, without the benefit of photographs, and without the tenant having any ability to comment. Methamphetamine Costs
The landlord claimed decontamination costs and was permitted to add testing costs during the hearing.
Section 40(2)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) provides that a tenant must not use, or permit the premises to be used, for an unlawful purpose.
The tenant explained that he was not at the premises for the last 2 months of the tenancy because he was on bail, and his ex-partner lived there with his knowledge. The tenant said he did not see anyone using meth in the house.
Methamphetamine use or manufacture at residential premises is a breach of section 40(2)(b) of the Act.
In June 2017, Standards New Zealand published standard NZS 8510:2017 (the NZ Standard) for testing and decontamination of methamphetamine- contaminated properties. This adopted a standard of 1.5ug/100cm² for high use areas, for both manufacture and use.
Professor Gluckman, the government’s chief science advisor, authored a report dated 29 May 2018 which concluded that methamphetamine levels exceeding the NZ Standard level of 1.5ug/100cm² “...should not be regarded as signaling a health risk”. The report said that exposure to methamphetamine levels below 15ug/100cm² would be unlikely to give rise to any adverse effects.
In Full Circle Real Estate v Piper [2019] NZDC 4947 the District Court had to determine whether the level of methamphetamine contamination would present a risk to human health. The District Court said the Gluckman report constituted the best available knowledge of the risks to human health from methamphetamine contamination. Therefore, it must be established not only that the premises are contaminated, but that there is contamination above 15ug/100cm².
The methamphetamine contamination was in the bathroom, which provided a reading of 16.5 ug/100cm². These findings are consistent with consumption, as noted in the testing reports.
The tenant said the decontamination cost of $1,955.00 was excessive for one room. Unfortunately, the Tribunal does not have any comparative costings to enable an assessment. I award the decontamination costs.
The landlord claimed $344.88 for a composite test invoiced on 20 November 2025, $320.85 for a screening test invoiced on 1 December 2025, $1,483.00 for the testing of individual samples invoiced on 3 December 2025 and $113.85 for testing an individual sample in the bathroom invoiced on 5 December 2025.
I can understand the testing of individual samples and the subsequent testing of the bathroom following decontamination. I award $1,596.85 for these tests. I am not sure why there were effectively two screening tests. I reduce this part of the testing costs by 50% and award $332.87.
Although the tenant did not use drugs at the premises, he is liable for the actions of others pursuant to section 41 of the Act. Filing Fee and Name Suppression
The landlord’s application has been largely successful. I must award the filing fee.
Suppression is granted as requested.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5414768 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5414768 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions